Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

Status
Not open for further replies.
BStrong said:
You are so wrong on that one.

I once had a guy assert that because he had a piece of paper in his hand, he couldn't have committed the criminal act I observed him commit.

That's about a half step away, at best, from citing the soda pop controversy as a discussion point in this thread.
Click to expand...

Paper covers rock = Not Guilty.
 
MicahJava said:
I don't know, maybe you could say what you think about that fragment in the upper neck that Cyril Wecht identified?
Click to expand...
Was this "identified" fragment recovered and examined? Or perhaps it may have been a false positive as a fragment? Was Dr. Wecht at the autopsy? or was/is he reviewing all of the evidence that those in attendance witness/observed?
 
MicahJava said:
I don't know, maybe you could say what you think about that fragment in the upper neck that Cyril Wecht identified?
Click to expand...

When you feel confident enough to explain what the pin-the-headwound jive you're fixated on means in the larger context of the established evidence there may be a worthwhile debate.

You're coming off like the kid in the guitar store that plays Smoke on the Water over and over and over...
 
MicahJava said:
I don't know, maybe you could say what you think about that fragment in the upper neck that Cyril Wecht identified?
Click to expand...

Wecht has made a career out of questioning celebrity autopsies, and was the lone dissenter of the 9 pathologist panel for the HSCA.

I'd go with the other 8 instead of a glory hound.
 
Axxman300 said:
Wecht has made a career out of questioning celebrity autopsies, and was the lone dissenter of the 9 pathologist panel for the HSCA.

I'd go with the other 8 instead of a glory hound.
Click to expand...

Cyril Wecht hasn't mentioned this apparent fragment since he reported it in 1974, so I wouldn't stoop to accusing him of fraud just yet, Bucko.
 
Last edited:
BStrong said:
When you feel confident enough to explain what the pin-the-headwound jive you're fixated on means in the larger context of the established evidence there may be a worthwhile debate.

You're coming off like the kid in the guitar store that plays Smoke on the Water over and over and over...
Click to expand...

On the contrary, I would compare my postings here to Miles Davis' In A Silent Way. A 4 minute slow part, followed by a more improvisational 12-minute jazz bit characterized by several repetitive takes on the same riff, concluded by the same recording of the beginning 4-minute portion. Redundant, yet an undisputed masterpiece. Any troll can yell "Miles is a Judas" for making the transition to a more electric sound, but that doesn't make it a valid criticism.
 
Last edited:
bknight said:
Was this "identified" fragment recovered and examined? Or perhaps it may have been a false positive as a fragment? Was Dr. Wecht at the autopsy? or was/is he reviewing all of the evidence that those in attendance witness/observed?
Click to expand...

Do you have a basis for wondering if this was a false positive for a fragment on the X-ray? Maybe a newer, better team of forensic experts should take a look at the originals to clear the cobwebs.
 
Axxman300 said:
Not at the original autposy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Wecht
Click to expand...

The article indicates nothing concerning an "alleged" fragment, another question then arises, has anyone not in the CT camp, neutral objective examiner, concurred with Dr. Wecht's findings?

Do you have a basis for wondering if this was a false positive for a fragment on the X-ray? Maybe a newer, better team of forensic experts should take a look at the originals to clear the cobwebs.
Click to expand...

Why have further autopsies performed? Was the original one, incomplete, in error, contain false information?
I remember your insistence that the supervising doctor (even though he only witnessed, and did not perform in the autopsy)was an expert.
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
On the contrary, I would compare my postings here to Miles Davis' In A Silent Way. A 4 minute slow part, followed by a more improvisational 12-minute jazz bit characterized by several repetitive takes on the same riff, concluded by the same recording of the beginning 4-minute portion. Redundant, yet an undisputed masterpiece. Any troll can yell "Miles is a Judas" for making the transition to a more electric sound, but that doesn't make it a valid criticism.
Click to expand...

Swing! and a miss. After all the hardships with addiction and racism, you want to drag Miles into your mess? Hasn't the man suffered enough?

Here's your posting-jam mix:

 
I don't get the mindset that says "I think the autopsy is putting a wound lower down the back of the head, but that means the damage to the brain is wrong, ergo there was more than one head wound, even if there is no evidence of this", instead of: "I think the entry wound was lower down, but that doesn't match the damage to the brain, so maybe I am wrong and the entry wound is higher up, where the WC placed it, as that will better explain the description of the brain damage better, ergo I may be wrong".
 
Tomtomkent said:
I don't get the mindset that says "I think the autopsy is putting a wound lower down the back of the head, but that means the damage to the brain is wrong, ergo there was more than one head wound, even if there is no evidence of this", instead of: "I think the entry wound was lower down, but that doesn't match the damage to the brain, so maybe I am wrong and the entry wound is higher up, where the WC placed it, as that will better explain the description of the brain damage better, ergo I may be wrong".
Click to expand...

And the well known human behavior involving errors and omissions is never included in the equation.

Any choice between magic and human error, I vote for the error.
 
Axxman300 said:
Wonder why?

*hint, there isn't one*
Click to expand...

Because Wecht more or less thinks a missile entered the back and exited the throat? So, of course, how could a fragment in the upper neck have any relation with the back wound as initially described.

Any insight on how "false positives" can give the illusion of dense fragments on X-rays?
 
Last edited:
Tomtomkent said:
I don't get the mindset that says "I think the autopsy is putting a wound lower down the back of the head, but that means the damage to the brain is wrong, ergo there was more than one head wound, even if there is no evidence of this", instead of: "I think the entry wound was lower down, but that doesn't match the damage to the brain, so maybe I am wrong and the entry wound is higher up, where the WC placed it, as that will better explain the description of the brain damage better, ergo I may be wrong".
Click to expand...

At least you're showing signs that you somewhat grasp my words.
 
MicahJava said:
Because Wecht more or less thinks a missile entered the back and exited the throat? So, of course, how could a fragment in the upper neck have any relation with the back wound as initially described.

Any insight on how "false positives" can give the illusion of dense fragments on X-rays?
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what he thinks, we know where the bullet entered, and where the fragments exited. It's all on film.
 
BStrong said:
And the well known human behavior involving errors and omissions is never included in the equation.

Any choice between magic and human error, I vote for the error.
Click to expand...

Yes, human error is a concern. Error in memory from somebody giving testimony, or Micah's error in interpreting data. It's why in the past I have asked about precise measurements in the autopsy, or whatever, to try and work out if Micha has read them himself, or if he relies on what a CT book quotes.
 
abaddon said:
Which is it? More or less?
Click to expand...

Cyril kind of goes back and forth between what he thinks. One day he's giving an interview where he refers to the throat wound as an exit for the back wound, one day he's doing a talk where he makes fun of the idea of Kennedy hunching over to make that trajectory possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom